text:
Read the full story here Web Link
Town Square
Library audit shows they're in bad shape
Original post made on Jul 5, 2007
Read the full story here Web Link
Comments (94)
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 5, 2007 at 1:30 pm
We need to do three things:
1) Fund a bond measure that will repair our library's infrastructure - including physical improvments at Main, Downtown, and College Terrace, and a newly rebuilt Mitchel Park Library/Community Recreation Center.
2) Fund significant improvements in our library's collection, to bring it up to par with surrounding communities.
3) Fund increases in staff levels and staff training, so that the prior two investments can be optimized, and so that our library staff will have sufficient "headroom" to scale and innovate our library into the future.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 5, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Palo Alto's problem is that it has too many libraries for it's budget. We should reduce them to two libraries: The main library, and an expanded Mitchell Park library. Then, both North and South would have 1 decent library each.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 5, 2007 at 2:59 pm
I'm with you on this one JFP. Notice how Benjamin is just asking for "more money", "more money"? The bond approach failed last time. Let's look for more pragmatic solutions.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:06 pm
the city has been through this before. A vocal portion of the community (not necessarily a majority) feels that we need all 5 libraries and they should be maintained no matter what.
this position has already lead to one library director being driven from the city by this vocal minority.
We also know that our city council has no desire to upset any vocal minority, so they will take no action on this matter. Finally this does not involve climate change, so our mayor is not interested in this matter.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:18 pm
A community the size of Palo Alto shouldn't have a library system with five branches. It would be better served with just 2 branches - the Main and Mitchell Park - offering longer hours. Both libraries should be expanded and upgraded.
Lean & Mean
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:23 pm
We know the libraries are in bad shape. It is run by a city in bad shape. I expect the MP library is closed today because it is hot!!
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:36 pm
I'd save 3 libraries: Main, Mitchell and Children's. I'd sell off the Downtown Library land and use the proceeds to fix those three.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:43 pm
I have recently been to College Terrace to patronize it because I want to make use of this local resource. First, I was told that I had not returned a book that I absolutely remembered returning (not something I can usually say). Next, I had requested a book from the wiating list, but because of the long wait I checked it out of Los Altos instead. Wanting to free up my space for someone else in lone for it, I tried several times to get off the waiting list, and still found it on "wait" the shelf 2 weeks later -- so no one who was lower on the wait list than I had had a chance to read it.
I don't have this problem at Los Altos library. I think if this is the level of service we are getting at the branch libraries we should think about cutting back on branches, even though the College Terrace library is darling and my children spent many happy afternoons there over the years.
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Jul 5, 2007 at 3:46 pm
I believe the last library director was run out of town by the "pragmatic" citizens of Palo Alto when she suggested the same thing. Lets vote yes on a bond measure for Mitchell Park and then sort out everything else afterwards.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 5, 2007 at 4:23 pm
What will it cost our citizens if we shrink the library system? I'll bet that not one person except Benjamin has a clue about that.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 5, 2007 at 5:05 pm
>I believe the last library director was run out of town by the >"pragmatic" citizens of Palo Alto when she suggested the same thing.
I think you'll find the last library directory was run out of town by those who believed that they could have their cake and eat it. Well, the cake certainly looks like it's past its "use by" date now.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 5, 2007 at 5:29 pm
quality, it also looks like our community has spoken loud and clear throgh more than a few polls about what it really wants in a library system. Looks like you're in the minority.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 5, 2007 at 5:49 pm
I agree that Palo Alto libraries have tried to be all things to all people and consequently cost have skyrocketed. Palo Alto needs fewer libraries. Yes, some people will be inconvenieced by having to travel farther, but they will adapt.
a resident of Palo Verde
on Jul 5, 2007 at 6:23 pm
I love the Mitchell Park Library. Use it for reading books. Just use their excellent on-line
service to order a book, then zip over when notified it's in, and bring it home to read.
To me, that's the essence of excellent library service. Supplying books. .......But in addition,
at Mitchell I get a lovely building, splendidly styled, and friendly personnel. Only drawback
I know of is the air-conditioning system....... But it's otherwise a lovely, lovely library.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 5, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Broccoli--while polls may indicate "loud and clear" what the people of PA want, i suggest we put it to a real vote. The fact that polls indicate what the people want does not mean that we can afford it.
It is clear that Pa cannot, atthis time, afford 5 libraries. yes, i know there have been 5 libraries in PA for years and therefore given the PA mentality that change is bad, these libraries are sacred. unfortunately we do not have the resources to support 5 libraries--look at Mountain View with a beautiful big library.
Will there be change--i doubt it, the last director proposed it and was vilified by the "we are entitled to 5 libraries period" crowd. the city council will certainly not touch the issue with a 10 foot poll--they are scared of conflict.
unless there is a concrete plan to close some libraries, i plan to vote against any library bond issue and will encourage everyone else to do the same.
a resident of Meadow Park
on Jul 5, 2007 at 7:10 pm
I suggest we follow the city auditor's suggestions for saving money including making better use of staff and that we also continue our branch library system. For children, the elderly, the handicapped and those needing walkable neighborhood services, a branch library system is ideal. We have the libraries, we need to supply the funding they need gradually over time. Because of our shortage of water, smaller buildings which have been part of our water usage for many years and which will not need a lot of water if a fire should start seem more prudent.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 5, 2007 at 7:13 pm
I've never been polled and am just your "average" citizen with 3 kids. Two well-organized, updated libraries sounds excellent to me. The bond cost to update the five libraries just seemed rather exorbitant to me.
I've heard Mt. View has an excellent library. My neighbor (in PA) takes her son to that library on a regular basis. Too bad we can't have a similar situation here. I just don't think this city is so large that a library couldn't be reached without difficulty by bike from just about anywhere.
I think it's time for a change.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 5, 2007 at 7:26 pm
Not So Fast, You're running on empty - - - ideas.
Of course, some small minority of "why should I spend my moeny to improve the communtiy" voters will always be there. We'll deal with that.
btw, how long have you lived in Palo Alto?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 5, 2007 at 7:26 pm
The same old arguments.
Children, all PAUSD elementary schools have excellent libraries. My children get what they need there during the school year. We can ride a bike or get to the library as part of errands. My children do not need a branch library, it is a luxury.
The elderly, need to stop driving if they have to, but they are unlikely to walk more than a block to a library if they can't drive. They need a good public transport system (rte 88, the shuttle) to get them to the library. Alternatively, we need to be neighborly and offer rides to our elderly neighbors and let them be part of our lives. There is plenty of things they can do in return if it has to be done that way. The elderly do not need a branch library, it is a luxury.
The handicapped, if they are unable to walk more than a block or unable to drive are not likely to be in walking (or wheelchair)distance of a neighborhood library at present, so once again a good transport system or neighbors, can help them out. The handicapped to do not need a branch library, it is a luxury.
Those needing a walkable neighborhood, also need a good bus route or shuttle, or neighbors. It is unlikely they are that close to a neighborhood library at present. They do not need a branch library, it is a luxury.
As most people cannot understand the difference between need and want, we must define the difference. I do not need $1m, but I do want $1m. I can't have everything I want.
We do not need 5 libraries although we may want them. We do need money to improve a couple of those we have so the ideal would be to rent out the premises to get the money to pay for the upgrades.
And please note, I said rent not sell the present buildings. Do not do the same as the school board did. We may need the premises sometime in the future for things we are not even aware of. These city properties should remain city properties for our future legacy to those yet to come.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 5, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Broccoli - if you are asking me how long I've lived here - it's been 42 years so far - most of my life. Went through the palo alto school system; graduated from Gunn in the 70's. But I'm sure there are those who have lived here shorter and longer who want branch libraries to stay. I'm just one of the long-time residents who would be very happy with 2 stellar libraries.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 12:47 am
I'm with you, "not so fast." As long as the city insists on keeping five libraries, I will vote NO on the bond. Council made an emotional, not a fiscal decision to keep all branches open.
a resident of Walter Hays School
on Jul 6, 2007 at 1:44 am
Looks as though you haven't read the Auditor's report, only the newspaper story.
The criticism of staff inefficiency is really something, even though it is written gently. The report says that if staff was scheduled better (for example, fewer hours when the libraries are closed) the branches could have longer open hours.
And they have 9 people working on schedules! and it isn't done on the computer!! It boggles the mind.
Read the report, don't just repeat your prior prejudices.
a resident of Downtown North
on Jul 6, 2007 at 3:00 am
i agree with the folks who say 2 good libraries are better than 5 lousy ones........
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 5:31 am
The Mitchell Park Library was obsolete in 1985 when I moved to Palo Alto. I would take my two children there and it was filled with kids after school from Fairmeadow and JLS. There was not enough room for them to sit or study or even browse for books. The situation has only gotten worse over the years with increasing school enrollment. Yet south Palo Alto continues to suffer with a small, cramped facility. The Sunnyvale Library, where we previously lived, was far superior even if we had to drive to it. Drive! Is that the word that scares everybody??? Well, guess what ? We are already driving to the Mountain View, Los Altos and Menlo Park libraries. Enlarge, remodel Mitchell Park and think of all the gas Palo Altans will save.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 6, 2007 at 6:08 am
Broccoli--I have live in PA for 12+ years.
I think we need two libraries at most--however given the wy thing work in this town and the inability of the City Council to act in a manner that is best for the city (as opposed to what is best for the vocal minority) I think we are stuck with 5 libraries.
Vote no on the library bond measure.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 6, 2007 at 9:15 am
It is true that Palo Alto polls showed that PA residents wanted the branch library system. It's also true that the previous bond votes on this issue have shown that PA residents weren't willing to pay for a branch system.
There's a severe disconnect between what people want and what they're willing to pay for. The Mitchell Park bond is trying to get around this by ducking the broader question and trying to create a narrow focus on at just getting one library updated. It remains to be seen whether this sleight of hand will work.
a resident of Professorville
on Jul 6, 2007 at 9:41 am
Please don't forget that the Children's Library is currently going a renovation and expansion funded by a public/private partership and has a strong and capable friends group who raised the money for said renovation/expansion.
If Palo Alto does move to reduce the number of libaries it seems to me unlikely that the Children's Libary will be closed.
Myself and many others have said for years that 3 libraries (Main, Mitchell and Children's) is the via media or middle way for Palo Alto.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 10:35 am
q not q, you say "It is true that Palo Alto polls showed that PA residents wanted the branch library system. It's also true that the previous bond votes on this issue have shown that PA residents weren't willing to pay for a branch system."
The latter part of your statement is not quite accurate. Well over 60% voted for an improved system a few years ago, but the vote fell short because of the innane requirement that bond measures require 66.67% approval - a very high bar. So, what' we've had here regarding libraries (and some other things) is legislation by the minority. That won't happen again.
Library user, don't you just love it when someone takes one negative finding and makes a general conclusion from that? That's what you've done. Why not note that the audit suggests bolstering staff so that it can properly attend to all the responsibilities that librarians have, including staff for grant writing?
I read somewhere that every dollar we provide for our libraries results in a more than one dollar payback - that's a great investment!
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:14 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:18 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:20 am
Two decent libraries (with air conditioning, please) is the way to go, and it seems as though everyone posting here agrees. But where were you people when a (competent, decent, professional) library director was being run out of town by the "Friends" of the Library and others who want to get their own way at the expense of everyone else in town? The city has paid for report after report on the libraries and they all say the same thing about the branches, but we can't seem to get around this bunch of old obstructionists. Meantime, our librarians are disillusioned and being run ragged.
Incidentally the auditor highlighted the loan of laptops as being a high-risk thing that takes a lot of staff time to administer. It should be noted that that program was *forced* on the library by the Friends, which commonly gives the library money only if they can micromanage exactly what it is used for.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:23 am
I forgot to mention that for those who could not get to two libraries (funny how people in *other* towns are able to get around but Palo Altans can't) there is already an Operation Homebound book delivery service. Plus, a bookmobile, if really necessary, could be run at much lower cost than keeping a branch open.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:32 am
Funny how the carbon load in those *other* towns is greater than ours, because people have to drive to their library - and, how people in those *other* towns don't have the ability to use neighborhood libraries as cultural centers (which they're quickly evolving to).
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:43 am
When I first moved to the area, I lived in temporary housing in Menlo Park, and one of the first things I did was get a library card for the MP library. I later moved to the Palo Alto/Stanford area and picked up a card for the PA library system. The difference between the two systems is amazing. I tried my best with several of the PA branches but gave up after a while and continue to use the far better MP library. How can these seemingly similar communities offer such different quality? Did MP have a bond? Is it the two vs. five branch issue? Something has got to change for PA libraries - not sure what...
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 6, 2007 at 11:57 am
"I read somewhere that every dollar we provide for our libraries results in a more than one dollar payback - that's a great investment!"
The last time this statement came out I actually asked at the Main library to try and find out the details. I couldn't find any reference to this quote there and nor could the library assistants.
Can you paste a link to this study?
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 12:20 pm
q not q, here's a start:
Web Link
Web Link
Web Link
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 6, 2007 at 2:36 pm
The last link is particularly interesting. The Urban Libraries study says this about BRANCHES:
"The study concludes that public libraries are positioned to fuel not only new, but next economies because of their roles in building technology skills, entrepreneurial activity, and vibrant, livable places. The combination of stronger roles in economic development strategies and their prevalence -- 16,000 branches in more than 9,000 systems -- make public libraries stable and powerful tools for cities seeking to attract and build new businesses. "
BRANCHES make public libraries stable and powerful tools. etc.
a resident of Meadow Park
on Jul 6, 2007 at 3:09 pm
Because some people like the Menlo Park, Mountain View, Sunnyvale library systems (no branch libraries), Palo Alto shouldn't have branch libraries? Many U.S. cities support branch libraries, Palo Alto used to support branch libraries with adequate funding. Parent-Reader, the same old arguments are the reason many cities continue to support branch libraries - they are open during non-school hours, it is good for the elderly and handicapped to be independent, it is good for all of us to walk.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 4:09 pm
I believe libraries are essential to our citizens and our democracy. I would vote for the bond to finance the Mitchell Park library -- and community center -- in a hot second, IF we closed the other branches (except for Children's).
The audit says that operating a branch system "is ultimately a community and policy choice." There's plenty of debate about whether the majority of residents want the branches to remain open. Whether true or not, someone in the city has to take fiscal responsibility for that decision.
A survey asking people what they want is pointless unless they're willing to pay for it. Years ago a technology company I worked for ran focus groups for a new product. Everyone who saw the product loved it and wanted it. Problem was, no one asked them if they loved it enough to pay $10,000 for it. When the product launched, it was a disaster.
In order to have made the decision to keep all our existing libraries, the city's finance committee, the city council, and/or the LAC should have done a financial analysis to show how much money the current system costs and whether we can afford it to keep it and upgrade it. As a comparison, someone should have also done an analysis of what a single great library would cost. If such analyses exist, I would very much like to see them.
I've been trying to find out the cost of the branches, but there seems to be no way to get detailed information. Here's what I did find:
Adopted budget for each branch:
Main $1,723,973
Children's $682,563 (from Sept. 07 when it reopens)
Mitchell Park $1,290,806
College Terrace $256,846
Downtown $252,205
I'm told that the largest expenditures in the budget are salaries and collections. That's good to know, but I'm interested in specifics.
According to the online org chart for the library, we have 43.75 FTEs plus 12.7 hourly. I assume that some of the staff time under the org chart headings "Library," "Administration," and "Collection & Technical Services" are allocated to the various branches. I would like to see FTE and hourly broken out, showing salaries, benefits and pensions. And I'd like to know how many employees we could do without if we had only one library (plus Children's).
Collections are not budgeted by branch because they serve all the libraries. If we only had one library, how would the collections change? Would we need more or fewer materials?
Building maintenance comes from the Public Works budget. I'd like to know what it costs for utilities and maintenance of each branch.
What about IT and administrative services? Would they decrease if we closed the branches? Or would they increase because a great modern library would offer more services?
How about opportunity costs? If we closed three branches, what could we do with those properties?
Bottom line: A division manager or department manager would have ALL the information on ALL the costs of running his/her piece of the business. In the case of our library system, that means a line-by-line spreadsheet of costs for each branch. Does anyone have such a spreadsheet? If so, where can I find it?
The LAC recommended adding 28 hours of service across the system at a cost of approximately $115K/year. (As we know, the construction bond can't be used for operating expenses.)
Where will that money come from? I assume the information exists somewhere, since it would be irresponsible to propose a bond measure for facilities without having a source for operating expenses.
Is there a "Plan B" if the library bond does not pass? Your audit presents many problems that need to be fixed, so it seems a backup strategy should be in place.
Council will spend $70-$80K (of our money) to convince us to vote for the library bond, yet makes it difficult to determine the cost of our current system. Having made an emotional "policy choice," Council may not want residents to further examine options to close branches. But I would like to know where my tax dollars are being spent.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 4:41 pm
pat, Wishful thinking. The branches are going to remain open, and we're going to build Mitchell along with repairing years of neglected infrastructure work elsewhere - including a bolstering of collections and staff. Why? Because we're Palo Alto; we're proud; we know our libraries contribute to academic success; and, we're a visionary comunity.
There is no debate about whether residents want the branch system - polls clearly show that they do. And, our residents will gladly pony up a few bucks per household to keep our fantastic public library in tip-top shape, comparable with surrounding communities.
btw, nobody is asking any resident to pay $10K - yours is an apples and oranges example.
Our library infrastructure has been analyzed to a faretheewell. We need action, not analysis. Read the exhaustive reports and follow-ups, including polls, and _including_ the po0lls that say Palo Altans want what our LAC and City Council so far agree on.
btw, thanks for listing the investment we citizens of Palo Alto make in our branches. As you know, very good studies indicate that every dollar we invest pays back a benefit equal to $1.30-$4.50+ per dollar invested.
Let's hypothesize that a community spends "x" dollars for its library. Multiply that number by 1.30-4.50 to arrive at a true benefit array. What a deal!! Show me another municipal investment that pays back like that.
I hope you complete your computation ofo total investment, so that we can compute the real benefits ofo library service to our community. Thanks for your public service.
Council will spend $70-$80K (of our money) to convince us to vote for the library bond, yet makes it difficult to determine the cost of our current system. Having made an emotional "policy choice," Council may not want residents to further examine options to close branches. But I would like to know where my tax dollars are being spent.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 4:45 pm
oops! - please DISREGARD the last paragraph of my last post
I neglected to erase the last (erroneous) paragraph of pat's post, where he claims that Council made an "emotional policy choice" in its support for libraries.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Re library studies:
- From the Ohio library study at Web Link
"Nine public libraries in Southwest Ohio spent $74.4 million in 2005 on library operations. These expenditures included amounts for materials, database services, salaries, and other costs of operations at all main and branch libraries.
"Library patrons received direct benefits from library services during the same period of about $190.4 million. Therefore, for every dollar expended on library operations, the public received about $2.56 in directly quantifiable benefits."
Please note that taxpayers spent $74.4 million on library operations. The benefit to LIBRARY PATRONS was calculated by figuring out how much they would have paid to purchase books, DVDs, etc. if they were not able to get these materials free from the library.
This does NOT mean that $190.4 million went back into the general fund. In other words, it's not a return on investment as one would calculate in a business.
The St. Louis study provides similar information.
I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with this. It's just important to read the studies carefully and understand exactly what benefits they are touting.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 4:54 pm
I think you are the one indulging in wishful thinking. I'm pretty sure you are right the branches will stay open, but I'm just as sure the library bond won't pass. The most likely case is that Palo Alto continues to have an inferior library system, because the community is not willing to either fund the library system enough to have five decent libraries or cut the number of libraries to match the funding.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 6, 2007 at 5:37 pm
"As you know, very good studies indicate that every dollar we invest pays back a benefit equal to $1.30-$4.50+ per dollar invested."
Actually, no, the studies say that for every dollar that *has been spent* they can identify up to $10 in benefits. That doesn't mean that for every additional dollar that *will be* spent there is a corresponding increase in benefit. The results of the studies actually indicate that if you spend less then the benefit gain (percentage wise) will be more. This is due to the base cost already been offset.
I couldn't find anywhere in the studies that stated that if you spent Y in additional dollars you would gain XxY in additional benefits.
Happy to be proved wrong of course.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 6, 2007 at 6:12 pm
pat says (about return on library investment) " it's not a return on investment as one would calculate in a business."
Wrong. In fact, corporations all over the world calculate ROI line items like "good will", which often derive from benefit arrays.
The bottom line is that there is a positive benefit return to taxpayers who invest in libraries. Trying to make a benefit look like bad is rather disingenuous, don't you think, pat.
Q not Q, It made me chuckle when you claimed that the studies, which prove a positive benefit return, aren't guaranteed to do that in the future. Thus, you're asking for a negative proof, which is impossible to answer. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
The FACT is that there are POSITIVE community and fiscal benefits shown for library investment. the data and numbers are there.
I want to see YOUR data disproving this work, rather than the application of poor fiscal modeling and bogus logic (proving a negative, you should know better) Where is your data?
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
JFP, the bond will pass, because we are going to do a grass roots campaign like you've never seen here before. Citizens are going to hear FACTS, and they're going to hearthem in a language that they understand.
In all, it really upsets library naysayers that libraries are every bit as valuable as we've always thought they were, but even pay back positive benefits to taxpayers.
I'm still waiting for all those who don't agree with 23 STUDIES showing the same thing to come up with data that shows otherwise. They can't, and won't. What they;ll attempt to do is spin this great new information into a negative. It won't work this time.
a resident of Portola Valley
on Jul 6, 2007 at 6:54 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 7:48 pm
In order to investigate the benefit claims put forth by various people over the last year, I contacted the St. Louis library and obtained a print copy of the full library study. The benefits presented in that document are as I stated in my earlier post: benefits – based on the purchase price of materials borrowed – accrue to library users. I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
Broccoli's arguments are EXACTLY those emailed to me earlier this year by someone on our Library Commission.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 6, 2007 at 7:59 pm
For those interested, the proposed library budget is at:
Web Link
Information by branch is not available because the city keeps budget and cost information by line item and by division (e.g. salaries, supplies) rather than by location.
From the audit, an example of how multiple branches cost more than one library: Santa Clara has 11 employees staffing customer service desks in its 80,000 sq ft facility. Palo Alto has 14 employees for customer service desks in a total of 51,000 sq ft.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 7, 2007 at 12:40 am
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
There is no getting around the FACT that *23* municipal studies ALL showed that "NO LESS THAN 23 WELL-DESIGNED STUDIES HAVE CLEARLY SHOWN THAT PUBLIC LIBRARIES PAY BACK A PROFIT TO MUNICIPALITIES, BASED ON REAL BENEFITS RECEIVED FOR TAX DOLLARS SPENT".
Let's see your data to the contrary.
Yes, pat, multiple branches cost more than a single library. but they deliver more community and fiscal benefits than a single library, too.
a resident of University South
on Jul 7, 2007 at 8:38 am
I'd love to see our libraries add the LINK+ system which allows books not owned by the library to be borrowed from neighboring libraries. Several other local public libraries have this service and though I don't know the cost, it seems that it would give Palo Alto library patrons access to a much larger collection without the issues of space, use, etc. to need to be worked out.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 7, 2007 at 9:52 am
I have no idea what the system was called, but a while ago there was a book I wanted to borrow. The library staff found it for me in, I think, a San Francisco library. They obtained it for me for a small fee within a short space of time. I was particularly grateful as this book was a childhood favorite that I wanted to share with my children, it was out of print and not available at any of the online booksellers. This service was simple and needs to be utilised more often.
Older and less popular books should be available from other libraries without one library system (4 or 5 in Palo Alto) expected to hold a copy at each branch, a good system should be able to get books for you from not only local libraries, but libraries all over the state or even the country. A fee for doing this is not unreasonable.
So I don't know much about the link system spoken about, but there does seem to be something similar, you just have to ask for help.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 7, 2007 at 10:11 am
Robin, could you explain further about Link plus but start another thread?
This thread has become unreadable.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 7, 2007 at 10:24 am
Wanna, Google up Link+ Palo Alto and you'll find links explaining it. It is an inter-library search/loan system that many around here belong to.
It is doubtlessly a useful thing, though I believe most libraries with these systems find they end up counting for only a very small percentage of circulation - so not really a substitute for expanding on-site collection.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 7, 2007 at 10:39 am
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Here's my data from the St. Louis Library Study, which, as I mentioned, I obtained from the St. Louis Library.
The study calculates benefits by adding all individual library service benefits, e.g., books for adults are used by 81% of the patrons, cost of a book is estimated, multiplied by # of users, which equates to a minimum of $484 per household. The sum of all library services provided to all patrons (books, CDs, computer use, etc.) comes out to $412m.
Benefit/Operating Budget = ROI
$485m/$46m = 1.036% (I've rounded the numbers)
What should be noted here is that "Benefits" is defined as benefits to library USERS, not to the general public or investors (taxpayers in this case).
I googled ROI and noted that the business definition uses earnings while the government definition uses benefits.
- return on invested capital: (corporate finance) the amount, expressed as a percentage, that is earned on a company's total capital calculated by dividing the total capital into EARNINGS before interest, taxes, or dividends are paid www.wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
- A figure of merit used to help make capital investment decisions. ROI is calculated by considering the annual BENEFIT divided by the investment amount.
In the library calculation, there is no real RETURN, just a shift in COST from a small group of people (library patrons) to the general tax paying public. There are no real dollars generated, just an illusion of savings.
If the library charged the same for the videos (for instance) as Blockbuster, would people choose to rent at the library rather than Blockbuster? If so, that would be an example of real "return." But the dollars calculated in this study are not real "returned" dollars -- they are illusory "not spent" dollars.
What I object to in these discussions is the mixed and undefined terminology used when making claims. When one shouts "THAT PUBLIC LIBRARIES PAY BACK A PROFIT TO MUNICIPALITIES, BASED ON REAL BENEFITS RECEIVED FOR TAX DOLLARS SPENT," one should be very clear about the definition of "profit" when referring to tax dollars spent.
Coincidentally, Sanford Forte of the LAC, in his guest opinion in the Weekly on 1/10/07
Web Link
says, "no less than 23 well-designed studies have clearly shown that public libraries actually pay back a profit to municipalities, based on real benefits received for tax dollars spent."
PLEASE NOTE: I absolutely agree that there are huge benefits to the community at large – as well as to patrons – from libraries! I believe in libraries. They're essential to learning and democracy.
It's good to be passionate about one's beliefs, but decisions should be made not on beliefs and wishful thinking, but on facts and data, especially when one is spending the taxpayers' money.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 8, 2007 at 8:40 am
Asked to prove a negative? I don't think so. I'm asking you to show me where the additional benefits will come from given additional funds being spent. Where is the "proving the negative" in this? Also, the onus is on you to prove the benefits will materialize not for anyone else to show they want. Simply pointing to study validating existing budgets is not enough.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 8, 2007 at 2:11 pm
The preliminary estimate of the cost of the library bond increase in property taxes per parcel was $20 per $100,000 of 'assessed valuation'. For a home recently purchased for $1.5M, that would be $300 more in taxes for $40M bond issue. Same is true for the Public Safety Building estimated at another $50M. Don't know if the PAUAD is proposing 3/4 billion bond issue or a parcel tax. Maybe a reader who knows more about this can clarify. Check your latest assessed valuation from the County Assessor's office and do the math. I intend to vote for the library bond issue. But I wonder if the $50M for the public safety bldg. is a little 'pricey'.
a resident of another community
on Jul 8, 2007 at 2:59 pm
I work in Palo Alto but live in Santa Clara. I have often wondered why PA does not have a better library system. In the past few years we built a beautiful library in Santa Clara. It is on Central Park, two stories high with an underground parking garage. It is well-used and well-loved. There are so many wonderful features: a cafe, Friends of the Library bookstore, community meeting rooms, quiet study rooms, a genealogy section, senior services, a children's garden, internet access, etc. The building faces the park and upstairs rooms with their large windows are particularly welcoming. There is delightful and beautiful artwork throughout. The library was built on time and under budget. It is one of the top libraries in the country for a city its size. I believe that with all of the talent in PA, the library problem can be solved. Frankly, speaking from 25+ years of working in your city, I find the "Palo Alto Process" overly time-consuming, paralyzing at times, and often unproductive.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 8, 2007 at 5:41 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 9, 2007 at 6:11 am
I'm with all those people who say two good libraries are better than five inferior branch libraries. However, it won't happen because Council hasn't got the stomach to even threaten to close two branch libraries. So, what's the answer, well, my answer will be to vote against any bond measure for libraries. Close the two branch libraries first, then ask the residents for a bond measure to upgrade main and Mitchell.
a resident of Palo Alto Orchards
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:24 am
Gee, I don't see what all the fuss is about. If Libraries really are really the great investment that proponents say the 23 studies report, the pay for themselves and throw off enough extra money to fix the streets and give all our hard working employees a raise - just using the money we're spending on them now.
I mean, we're spending northwards of $5 million/year for libraries now under almost any reasonable estimate of the budget figures. We should be getting $20 million return/year on it according to those 23 studies. We can use that to pay for that new branch they want in 3 or 4 years, and then this great profit can be paid back into the treasury to pay for our infrastructure needs, etc after that.
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:42 am
Basically, when asked for proof of your statement on where this additional benefit will come for Palo Alto, all you've done is google a few study and you really want Palo Alto residents to release $40M in funds to you based on that?! You can't show what benefits Palo Alto residents will receive from these additional funds! When asked for this you accuse those "you're asking me to prove a negative". This is very sad.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:49 am
Sally, to help you understand: library investment benefits accrue to taxpayers as quantified benefits, not direct cash payments. Why would you want your fellow citizens to do without benefits that acrue from libraries?
Sounds like you're making the broad claim that unless a public service can deliver back a cash profit back to the city, it shouldn't be funded - with the result that police, library, education, and other vital services would disappear.
The position you support, with the resultant failure of past bond efforts, have begun to add to the premature decay of a number of city institutions.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:58 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 9:00 am
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 9:16 am
Broccoli and Q -
I am sure you are both very smart people and obviously care about our town and libraries. So why trade public insults? It doesn't move the issue along and discourages others from being part of the discussion. Let's all be the bigger person and let it go.
A question I asked before I would love to hear both your views on - could we turn our libraries over to the Santa Clara County Library system and have them run them? I don't understand how City and County libraries interact and what limits there are (if any) on what each can do. But I do know that SC County Libraries are top rated in the nation (and excellent in my experience) while ours are decrepit and, per our Auditor's report, not very well managed. So we have a tough situation - who wants to pour money into a badly managed system? Meanwhile, it is hard to improve operations (recruit key staff, upgrade systems, etc.) without a commitment to spending. A way out would be to give our floundering assets to the excellent management team at SCC; we lose some or all control, but frankly I am not sure we have that much to lose at this point. Perhaps we could fund the assets (buildings, collection) and they could operate?
What do you think, smart people?
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:04 am
Fred, I like your idea! It makes a lot of sense. I too wonder about spending.
If the bond passes, where will the money for computers, furniture, additional collections, etc. come from? (As we know, the construction bond can't be used for operating expenses.)
If the bond does not pass, what's the contingency plan?
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:19 am
You're wrong. Where does the auditors's report say that the library system is badly managed? Where did the auditor's report conclude that as a general finding?
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Palo Altans _value_ their public library, _with branches_ That has been clearly demonstrated in poll after poll, and during the last bond measure, which had well over 60% of Palo Altans voting FOR the present system.
Yes, the SCC library system is an excellent system, and run well. However, giving over our system over to the County would probably mean the death of Palo Alto's branch library system. Surely, the branches would disappear. Also, where would that leave our heralded and much loved Children's Library.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:02 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:13 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Downtown North
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:33 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of St. Claire Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:37 pm
The statement that $40MM spending on libraries will provide $180MM in benefits for the city is conceptually different from a prediction based on past experience that the sun will come up tomorrow. The former statement is capable of being supported by facts, the other is not.
To confuse this (while steadfastly refusing to supply such supporting facts) is itself evidence of an incapacity for logical thought that makes this entire discussion border on the farcical.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Assuming, arguendo, that it is true that public libraries provide a benefit above their cost, it is not necessarily true that
(a) libraries are somehow exempt from the law of diminishing returns, and that on the margin there will be increased benefits for every dollar spent; or that
(b) branch libraries provide any financial benefit over main libraries.
At this time I would vote no on a library bond issue, but would happily support a reasonable bond that provides for renovation of Mitchell Park and Main library.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 1:11 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 1:34 pm
First, the law of diminishing returns does not apply to libraries, especially when one takes into consideration the multipliers resulting from human interaction with libraries.
The outputs of library systems are the people that use and benefit from the library system.
Please explain how returns to individuals as benefits are decreased over time as citizens use libraries.
Second, branch libraries provide many economic and social benefits over main libraries, the foremost of which is increase in availability and access.
A study quoted above nicely makes the point - from Forum Reader, above:
"The Urban Libraries study says this about BRANCHES:
"The study concludes that public libraries are positioned to fuel not only new, but next economies because of their roles in building technology skills, entrepreneurial activity, and vibrant, livable places. The combination of stronger roles in economic development strategies and their prevalence -- 16,000 branches in more than 9,000 systems -- make public libraries stable and powerful tools for cities seeking to attract and build new businesses. "
BRANCHES make public libraries stable and powerful tools. etc."
a resident of Palo Verde
on Jul 9, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Let's see: 1. $4.50 return per dollar invested in libraries, and 2. No diminishing returns to spending on libraries.....
Hmmm...Why are we limiting ourselves to a measly $40 million on libraries? We also ought to sink the entire city budget of $140 million into the library system, sell the city owned utilities for $1Billion more and spend that on libraries, then tax ourselves another $20K per resident (after all..we get that $4.50 per dollar spent) for another $1 Billion or so - for even more libraries. All told, I bet we can come up with around $2.5 Billion to invest in libraries....giving us a return of around $11 Billion or a cool $200,000 per resident.
What are we waiting for?! I got a guy who wants to sell me a bridge in Brooklyn for my share of the profit.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 9, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Brilliant :->
This thread delivers.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Your data tells me nothing about the specific contribution of branch libraries, and your oft-repeated quote is a general reference to library systems in general.
For what it does say, your quote refers to "16,000 branches in more than 9,000 systems". That makes - wait, don't tell me, less than 2 branches per system.
No one is saying cut off all the branches - it makes sense to keep Main, Mitchell and Childrens, leaving 3 branches in Palo Alto.
The two smaller branch libraries are convenient for a very small percentage of the population, particularly College Terrace which is a charming building but serves only a tiny number of people. They should be shut down so that the larger branches can be better maintained.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 3:55 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 4:02 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 4:44 pm
And do you have data that suggests there is wide use of the College Terrace branch? I have reviewed the library audit and don't see the information is there. How many people DO actually use that branch? Do they drive from the far ends of town to get there?
Perhaps it could be converted to a few classrooms for language immersion?
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Broccoli, it must be hard putting up with us! None of us can get our facts straight. I hope I can be so right so often on something.
I would love to see better libraries in PA; I am a big supporter. But Broc makes me just want to go to the SCC library in Los Altos.
I expect, as has been the case in other towns, that over time a new library will get built; a budget crunch will hit; and sub-scale branches will close. But a nice new library will have to come first.
[Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 9, 2007 at 4:55 pm
Yeah! Broccoli!
As I recall, an informal survey taken by a College Terrace Residents Assn. poll showed that roughly 30% of users were from outside CT. I think that number is corroborated in the larger library study. It's a pretty well-known fact that all our library use is not limited just to residents from surrounding neighborhoods.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Thank you Fred.
You have a nice way of putting things.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:03 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Please provide cites to each of these "23 well-designed studies" so that they can be reviewed.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:17 pm
Naysayer, there are links provided above to the first study (ST. Louis), and a few follow up studies. Go through those, and follow your boolean search to the others (you know, Google). If you're having trouble with that, you might try calling a reference librarian for information, or visiting one of your local branch libraries. There is also another thread on this forum, replete with links. If you have the time to read them with a clear, open mind, you will soon joinn my ranks.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:26 pm
According to the St Louis study:
"First, the SLPL Services Valuation Study is no longed-for "magic bullet" providing some simplistic formulation that other libraries can pick up and apply simply without thought to derive the benefits of investment in another library system."
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 5:30 pm
I thought we'd got over this. You have yet to identify a single dollar in additional benefits for Palo Alto - let alone $180M. Yet you want Palo Alto to spend $40M and want other people to prove why they shouldn't give it to you?!
This is an incredible position to take, it's like fund raising in reverse.
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 6:41 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:02 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Broc, you make me sad about politics and debate in PA, despite the fact that I am a big supporter of libraries. I hope we can be more civil and constructive as a community. Good luck.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 9, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Value of a library is calculated at:
Web Link
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:11 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:58 pm
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
Don't miss out
on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Get important election coverage sent straight to your inbox daily.
Former Flea St. Cafe chef starts meal delivery service
By Elena Kadvany | 1 comment | 6,909 views
10 ways to reduce your dog's "pawprint"
By Sherry Listgarten | 9 comments | 4,482 views
Why can't high schoolers write?
By Jessica Zang | 13 comments | 2,748 views
"Plant an Expectation, Reap a Disappointment"
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,900 views
'Ignoring what's wrong has never made anything right'
By Diana Diamond | 4 comments | 1,274 views
Benefiting local non-profits
The 36th annual Moonlight Run and Walk is Friday evening, October 2, wherever you are! Proceeds go to the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund, benefiting local non-profits that serve families and children in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. Join us under the light of the full Harvest Moon on a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon.


text:
NEWS- Caucused: Weed predicts delegate win
Fifth District Democrats have taken the arduous caucus route to determine who will run against Republican incumbent Virgil Goode in November. Nelson county farmer Al Weed says he's four votes from securing the nomination– but consultant Bern Ewert's camp scoffs at the idea that Weed's candidacy is in the bag.
At a convention in Buckingham County, 196 Democratic delegates will cast their ballots May 20 to decide who runs for Congress against Goode.
After caucuses April 22 and April 24, Weed laid claim to 95 delegates. "If you take away Charlottesville-Albemarle, where we've won overwhelmingly, we've won everywhere else 2-1," says Weed. He gathered 12 of Charlottesville's 17 delegates April 24, and pulled in 31 of Albemarle's 37 delegates.
"It's reasonable to expect at least four more delegates from the 39 that will be elected Saturday, April 29," says Weed. That would give him 99 delegates out of the 196– enough to win the nomination– if his numbers are right. The day after the April 24 Mega-Monday, Fifth District Democratic Chair Fred Hudson puts Weed at 92 delegates and Ewert at 42, with 14 or 15 uncommitted.
But Marlin Adams, Ewert's campaign manager, says, "It's not looking grim at all. It's going to be decided at the convention– and the first ballot is a secret ballot."
Weed says his delegates are "morally obligated to vote for us."
"There's a moral obligation to win," retorts Adams, who points out that Weed was "whupped" by Goode 3 to 1 in the 2004 election. "No Democrat I've talked to thinks Al can win the general election," says Adams.
He attributes Weed's delegate gathering to an "emotional" attachment Dems have to the candidate who ran two years ago, but he says, "Bern Ewert has a long résumé of accomplishment. He's a stronger candidate to run in this conservative 5th District."
Ewert supporter Mitch Van Yahres is less optimistic about Ewert's chances to secure the Democratic nomination. "It's a real long shot at this stage," says Van Yahres après Mega-Monday. He, too, calls the delegates "morally committed," and thinks they will be hard to lure away from Weed.
Van Yahres, former delegate to the 57th District, believes Ewert has a better chance to win in the more conservative, more economically depressed Southside. "That's where the election will be won or lost," he predicts.
Former Roanoke city manager Ewert bested Weed in caucuses in Danville, and Bedford, Charlotte, and Buckingham counties, according to Hudson.
"He says he can win Southside," says Weed. "Southside is not just Danville."
But Ewert sees his 9-6 win over Weed in Danville another way. "What it says is he's been campaigning there three years, and I have for three months, and I beat him." Southside has the highest unemployment in the country after Hurricane Katrina-ravaged areas, and Ewert supporters say his track record of creating jobs will resonate there.
But first he has to get the nomination. At the convention, Ewert is counting on the undecideds and that secret ballot. "People will vote their conscience," he says.
Party chair Hudson compares the caucus process to water torture: "It's like election night spread over two weeks." The advantage to the caucus over a primary? "It's an extraordinarily good method for party building," says Hudson.
Even with Weed's substantial lead, Hudson doesn't see the nomination as a done deal. "It's a secret ballot," he notes. "They do change, they flop around a little bit.
"Anybody who got to 99 and said, 'Yay, yay, I win'– that would be a mistake," he adds.
Bern Ewert says he's the Democrat who can beat Virgil Goode in Southside Virginia.
Al Weed leads the Dem caucus race 2-1 over Bern Ewert, but says he's not taking anything for granted.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Apollo Program dominated NASA in the 1960s. Its chief aim was to place a man on the moon ahead of the Soviet Union and before 1970. In December 1963, three of NASA's four approved robotic exploration programs - Ranger, Surveyor, and Lunar Orbiter - focused on the moon. The fourth, Mariner, aimed at Mars and Venus. Apollo requirements - the need to find safe landing sites and to understand lunar conditions well enough to design the Apollo Lunar Excursion Module lander - dominated the moon programs. Beating the Communists to Venus and Mars was a major motivator for Mariner. In short, Cold War geopolitics ruled, not scientific exploration.
On 2 December 1963, NASA Lunar and Planetary Program staffers briefed NASA top brass (Administrator James Webb, Deputy Administrator Hugh Dryden, and Associate Administrator Robert Seamans) with the aim of shifting NASA's robotic program priorities toward science. In his introductory presentation, Lunar and Planetary Program Director Oran Nicks solicited funding to enhance the four extant programs with new science-focused missions. He also sought funding to initiate the new Voyager Mars/Venus program.
Nicks reminded Webb, Dryden, and Seamans that Mariner II had scored an impressive first by flying past Venus in December 1962. He then noted that, one year after achieving world's first successful planetary flyby, NASA's entire approved planetary program consisted of just two Mars flybys (Mariners III and IV, set for launch in November 1964). Mariner missions planned after 1964 were, he stressed, "not firm." He blamed funding cuts and persistent problems with the Centaur upper stage for this surprising failure to follow up on Mariner II's success. Nicks then turned the briefing over to his Lunar and Planetary Program managers.
By the time Ranger Program Manager N. William Cunningham stood before Webb, Dryden, and Seamans, Rangers I through V had failed. Ranger I (launched 23 August 1961) and Ranger II (launched 18 November 1961), "Block I" vehicles meant to gather data on micrometeoroids, radiation, solar plasma, and magnetic fields in high elliptical Earth orbit, had fallen victim to Atlas-Agena B rocket malfunctions, as had Ranger III (launched 26 January 1962), a Block II spacecraft meant to rough-land a spherical balsa-wood capsule bearing a seismometer on the moon. Ranger IV (launched 23 April 1962) and Ranger V (launched 18 October 1962), also Block IIs, had suffered electrical failures.
Cunningham began his presentation by telling Webb and his deputies that Ranger VI, a Block III spacecraft designed to snap photos of the moon while plummeting toward destructive impact, would launch in January 1964. He assured them that his engineers had made "many changes in. . .the spacecraft. . .in an effort to improve its chances for success."
Four Block IIIs (Rangers VI through IX) were expected to photograph the moon by August 1964, then six Block Vs (Rangers X through XV) would fly in 1965-1967. Cunningham noted that NASA planned to spend $92.5 million on Block V Rangers. Much like the Block IIs, Block V Rangers would attempt to rough-land capsules containing instruments, including possibly a TV system for beaming to Earth images from the moon's stark surface. Cunningham called the Block Vs "the only backup" the U.S. had in place for the Surveyor Program, then urged Webb and his lieutenants to add $50 million to the Block V Ranger development budget.
Surveyor Program Manager Benjamin Milwitzky took the floor next. He told Webb, Dryden, and Seamans that his program's main purpose was to gather "essential data about the lunar surface. . .needed for manned landings." An Atlas-Centaur rocket would launch the first Surveyor soft-lander in 1965. Milwitzky reported that Surveyor had been intended to carry 300 pounds of science instruments, but that Centaur upper stage problems had forced a cut to between 70 and 100 pounds. He told them that, while the reduced payload would be adequate for scouting Apollo landing sites, many lunar science opportunies would have to be abandoned.
Milwitzky proposed that Surveyor's science payload be restored by adding the corrosive element fluorine to the Atlas rocket's liquid oxygen propellant. He urged Webb, Dryden, and Seamans to spend $40 million in 1964-1966 to develop this energetic oxidizer mix for the Atlas.
If they agreed to beef up the Atlas, then the first advanced science-focused Surveyor could fly in 1967. A typical advanced Surveyor lander might include a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator that would provide its instruments with long-term electricity, a drill for subsurface sample collection, sample analysis gear, a geophysical probe that could be lowered down the drill bore hole, a seismometer, a mast-mounted TV system for imaging a large area around the lander in stereo, and a small rover for exploring the landing site and emplacing explosive seismic packages a safe distance away from the lander.
Milwitzky ended his presentation by proposing that NASA increase the number of planned Surveyor missions from 17 to 29. He estimated that the 17-mission program would cost $425.5 million; adding 12 more missions would cost an additional $352 million.
Milwitzky then handed off to Lee Scherer, Lunar Orbiter Program Manager. Scherer began his presentation by reminding Webb and his deputies that Lunar Orbiter missions 1 through 5 had been approved for 1966-1967, and that Lunar Orbiters 6 through 10, while not yet formally approved, were planned for 1967-1968. Lunar Orbiter spacecraft would, he said, aim "to obtain, initially, scientific data about the moon and its environment of special importance to the Apollo mission." The approved Lunar Orbiters were intended mainly to photograph areas of the lunar surface accessible to Apollo spacecraft (that is, close to the equator on the Nearside, the lunar hemisphere that forever faces Earth).
Scherer proposed that NASA fly five science-oriented Lunar Orbiters in 1968-1969. These might enter orbits inclined to the lunar equator, enabling them to pass over scientifically interesting surface features beyond the equatorial Apollo landing zone. They might also enter lunar polar orbit for whole-moon mapping. Gamma-ray spectrometers and infrared sensors might be used to map lunar mineralogy. Scherer also proposed a mission dedicated to exploring moon/Sun plasma interactions and any lunar magnetic field that might exist. Lunar Orbiters 1 through 10 would cost $198 million; Scherer estimated that adding Lunar Orbiters 11 through 15 would boost the program's cost by $95 million.
The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, first proposed the ambitious Voyager Mars/Venus robotic spacecraft series in 1960. In December 1963, Voyager was not yet an approved NASA program, though studies continued at JPL and NASA Headquarters. According to Donald Hearth, the Lunar and Planetary Program Office staffer responsible for Voyager, NASA had allotted $7.1 million for Voyager studies in 1962-1963. Of this, all but $1.3 million had been shifted to cover funding shortfalls in other programs.
Assuming that Congress approved its development, the Voyager spacecraft would comprise three parts: a 2000-pound orbiter with a 2000-pound retro stage and a 2500-pound lander. These would leave Earth together on a two-stage Apollo Saturn IB augmented with a Centaur third stage. For Mars missions, the Voyager lander would separate from its orbiter during approach to the planet, enter the atmosphere directly from its interplanetary trajectory, and land within 500 kilometers of a target site. It would explore its landing site for six months. After lander separation, the Voyager orbiter would fire the retro stage to slow down so that Mars's gravity could capture it into orbit.
Hearth told Webb, Dryden, and Seamans that the Voyager 1969 Mars lander would carry an impressive suite of 38 science instruments, including two TV cameras, a sample-collection drill, biology detectors, a microscope, a seismometer, a microphone, and meteorology sensors. Voyager 1969 Mars orbiter instruments would include multicolor stereo TV cameras, an infrared spectrometer for determining surface composition over wide areas, a magnetometer for charting the martian magnetic field, a cosmic dust detector, and a solar X-ray detector.
Though more capable than any other U.S. lunar or planetary spacecraft, the Saturn IB/Centaur-launched Voyagers would pale next to planned Saturn V-launched Advanced Voyagers. Hearth reported that the Saturn V rocket could launch to Mars a 3100-pound orbiter and one or more direct-entry landers weighing a total of 33,000 pounds. These "large lander laboratories" might carry rovers, balloons, and hovercraft to enable exploration beyond their landing sites. Alternately, the Advanced Voyager orbiter might carry a large retro stage that would enable it to retain its lander until after it achieved Mars orbit. Lander descent from Mars orbit would improve landing accuracy, Hearth explained.
Hearth estimated that the Voyager Program would cost $2.9 billion over 11 years. Assuming timely approval, NASA could launch Voyager test flights in 1967 and 1968, Voyager Mars missions in 1969, 1971, and 1973, Voyager Venus missions in 1970 and 1972, and Advanced Voyager Mars missions in 1973 and 1975.
Within a week of the 2 December 1963 briefing, James Webb informed Oran Nicks that NASA could not afford to expand its robotic lunar and planetary programs in support of science. In fact, before long it became clear that NASA would cut back its robotic lunar programs, sharply limiting opportunities for science-focused missions. In a sense, Ranger, Surveyor, and Lunar Orbiter became victims of their own success; almost as soon as they proved themselves to be capable exploring machines by providing the data Apollo engineers and planners needed, NASA top brass opted to end them and move on.
In all, scientists were granted four missions specifically for scientific lunar exploration. Though Ranger VI was an embarrassing failure, Rangers VII and VIII succeeded, and the program concluded with the successful science-focused Ranger IX mission to Alphonsus crater in March 1965. All were Block III spacecraft; no Block V Ranger ever flew. Five Lunar Orbiters mapped the moon between August 1966 and January 1968. Lunar Orbiters 4 and 5 were science-focused missions in a near-polar orbits. Surveyor ended with its seventh flight, a science-focused mission to the young crater Tycho in January 1968.
The NASA planetary program suffered heartbreaking cuts, but also expanded its reach beyond Mars and Venus. The 1960s and early 1970s saw a total of seven successful Mariners. In July 1965, Mariner IV became the first spacecraft to fly past Mars. No Mariner ever carried an atmosphere probe, but Mariner 9 (May 1971-October 1972) became the first Mars orbiter. Mariner 10, the last of the series, became the first spacecraft to fly past Mercury (in fact, it flew past the planet three times, in March 1974, September 1974, and March 1975).
Voyager became an official NASA program in 1965, just in time to see its design scrapped and its estimated cost nearly double. New data from Mariner IV was the culprit: its successful first Mars flyby revealed that the planet's atmosphere was 10 times thinner than expected. Because of this, Voyager would need heavy landing rockets in addition to parachutes. The star-crossed program lingered on until August 1967, when Congress refused to fund its continued development. NASA then proposed a cut-price Mariner-derived Mars landing program called Viking which received Congressional approval in 1968. Two Viking orbiter-lander pairs explored Mars beginning in 1976. The name Voyager was subsequently resurrected for twin Mariner-derived outer planets flyby spacecraft launched in 1977.
Briefing for the Administrator on Possible Expansion of Lunar and Planetary Programs, NASA Headquarters, December 2, 1963.


text:
Total Solution for your Media Conversion. Convert all video files to AVCHD, psp, iPod, iPhone, swf, flv, DVD, VCD, Xbox360, PS3... ! E.M. Total Video Converter (TVC ) is a piece of extremely powerful and full-featured converter software that supports almost all video and audio formats. The software is designed to convert video for your mobile video player as 3gp, mp4, PSP, PS3, iPod, iPhone etc and also VCD or DVD player, XBOX360. Interface is simple and beautiful; Reaching various functions you only need to click the buttons. Even if you are a new user, you can understand it quickly either.
Total Video Converter includes a powerful media conversion engine which can save your much valuable time and help you with high speed contrast to the congeneric production. You can set detailed information for decode, video size, frame rate, video and audio formats, bit rate, sampling rate, etc and convert the files with convenience according to you demand.
Total Video Converter is a powerful and versatile video conversion software which supports playing and converting all kinds of video and audio formats files to be played in iPod, PSP, Zune, cellphone, PMP, PDA etc. Integrated Media Burning tool burns the converted files to AUDIO CD, VIDEO DVD/SVCD/VCD.
New Total Video Converter 3.50 let you experience Unparalleled High-Definition movie. It is the best and unique software today with incomparable support for converting and burning video to AVCHD disc which can work on PS3 and Blu-ray player. Meanwhile, it supports for converting and burning video to HD formats like H.264 TS, Mpeg-2 TS, WMV-HD, MKV-HD, DivX-HD, Divx-HD, MOV-HD, FLV-HD and MP4-HD.
E.M. Total Video Converter New Features:
1 Convert and burn video to AVCHD which can work on PS3 and Blu-ray player. What's more, the HD videos of AVCHD (*.mts, *.m2ts, *.ts) can been converted to any other video formats.
2 Convert video to HD formats like H.264 TS, Mpeg-2 TS, WMV-HD, MKV-HD, DivX-HD, Xvid-HD, MOV-HD, FLA-HD and MP4-HD
3 Convert and burn WMV-HD video to DVD. Meanwhile, it can work on XBOX360.
4 Convert and burn common video to DivX-DVD. More importantly, it can work on DVD player with DivX capability.
5 Integrate a free tool for capturing game video.
Main Features of Total Video Converter:
• Convert all kinds of videos to mobile videos or audios (mp4, 3gp, xvid, divx mpeg4 avi, amr audio) which are used by cell-phone, PDA, PSP, iPod, iPhone, Xbox360, PS3 etc.;
• Photos slide show combines multi-photos and musics with more than 300 photos fantasy transition effect;
• High compatibility and high efficiency for Importing RMVB or RM video/audio;
• Convert various videos to MPEG videos compatible with standard DVD/SVCD/VCD;
• Burn the converted videos to DVD/SVCD/VCD;
• Rip DVD to popular videos of all sorts;
• Extract audio from various of videos and convert which to all kinds of audios (mp3, ac3, ogg, wav, aac);
• RIP CD to audios of all sorts directly;
• Support using with command line;
• Combine several video and audio files to one video file;
• Demultiplex or extract video and audio;
• Multiplex video and audio to one file;
Total Video Converter supports generating the following file formats:
Video Formats:
Convert to MPEG4(.mp4)
Convert to 3gp(.3gp, 3g2)
Convert to Game Psp (.psp)
Convert to MPEG1 (.mpg, mpeg)
Convert to NTSC, PAL DVD mpeg and Burn to DVD disc
Convert to NTSC, PAL SVCD mpeg and Burn to SVCD disc
Convert to NTSC, PAL VCD mpeg and Burn to VCD disc
Convert to Ms Mpeg4 AVI (.avi)
Convert to Divx AVI (.avi)
Convert to Xvid AVI (.avi)
Convert to H264 AVI (.avi)
Convert to Mjpeg AVI (.avi)
Convert to HuffYUV AVI (.avi)
Convert to Swf Video (.swf)
Convert to Flv Video (.flv)
Convert to Gif Animation (.gif)
Convert to Mpeg4 Mov (.mov)
Convert to Apple Quicktime (.mov)
Convert to DV (.dv)
Convert to WMV (.wmv)
Convert to HD Mpeg TS (.ts)
Convert to ASF (.asf)
Audio Formats:
Convert to MPEG audio(.mp3, mp2)
Convert to Ms WAV (.wav)
Convert to Ms WMA (.wma)
Convert to OGG (.ogg)
Convert to Amr audio (.amr)
Convert to AC3 (.ac3)
Convert to SUN AU format (.au)
Convert to m4a (mp4 audio)
Convert to aac (aac audio)
Convert to mmf (mmf audio)
Convert to Flac (flac audio)
Home Page - http://www.effectmatrix.com/index.htm
TO MAC USERS: If RAR password doesn't work, use this archive program:
RAR Expander 0.8.5 Beta 4 and extract password protected files without error.
TO WIN USERS: If RAR password doesn't work, use this archive program:
Latest Winrar and extract password protected files without error.


text:
Trianthema portulacastrum L. - Desert Horsepurslane
* Image is also available in higher resolution: 52418.jpg (1600x1197 - 525 kb).
Author: Forest & Kim Starr [Other photographs by this author]
Determination author: Forest & Kim Starr [Determination history and verification]
Hawaii (United States of America), Mokulua South, Oahu
23 February 2005
Starr F., Starr K.: Plants of Hawaii [http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/index...]
|CC-BY Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 [Information]
Images created by Forest Starr and Kim Starr are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, permitting sharing and adaptation with attribution.
You must credit the photographers "Forest & Kim Starr". We would appreciate being contacted (starrimages(at)hear.org) when our images are used, and if possible receiving a copy of or link to the publications they are used in.


text:
715 Ash Lane
San Marcos, California, 92069
Commute to Downtown San Marcos
Most errands require a car.
Minimal bike infrastructure.
715 Ash Lane has a Walk Score of 25 out of 100. This location is a Car-Dependent neighborhood so most errands require a car.
This location is in San Marcos. The closest park is Cerro de las Posas Park.
Explore how far you can travel by car, bus, bike and foot from 715 Ash Lane.
Rail lines:
0.9 mi
Bus lines:
305 Vista TC - Escondido TC
0.8 mi
View all San Marcos apartments on a map.
Popular apartment searches include pool, fireplace and fitness.
Search for homes in San Marcos or find a San Marcos real estate agent who knows walkable neighborhoods. Links will open on our partner site Redfin.com.
This location is in the city of San Marcos, CA. San Marcos has an average Walk Score of 33 and has 83,781 residents.Learn More About San Marcos


text:
Login or create an accountClose
Returning Customer
I am a returning customer
Login or create an accountClose
Your Account Has Been Created!
Congratulations! Your new account has been successfully created!
You can now take advantage of member privileges to enhance your online shopping experience with us.
If you have ANY questions about the operation of this online shop, please e-mail the store owner.
A confirmation has been sent to the provided e-mail address. If you have not received it within the hour, please contact us.
Account Logout
You have been logged off your account. It is now safe to leave the computer.
Your shopping cart has been saved, the items inside it will be restored whenever you log back into your account.
USA, New Jersey, Fairfield, Night street scene was reproduced on Premium Heavy Stock Paper which captures all of the vivid colors and details of the original. The overall paper size is inches and the image size is inches. This print is ready for hanging or framing. Brand New and Rolled and ready for display or framing Print Title: USA, New Jersey, Fairfield, Night street scene Paper Size: inches Product Type: Poster Print
USA New Jersey Fairfield Night street scene Poster Print 6KDVA2SJA


text:
Muhammed Hasan Ahmed
Mozilla Rep, Campus Advisor at Mozilla Campus Clubs
O Moziljanu
I have been a Firefox Support Contributor on Mozilla Support Forum where I am also registered in the "Contributors" group.
I represented my country Pakistan, in the Mozilla Camp Asia 2011 which was held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from 18-20 November 2011.
I am also the Co-Founder of Mozilla Pakistan community and while there, I set-up the digital presence of our local Mozilla Pakistan community over different social media channels:
Currently, I am in the process of building the Mozilla Pakistan community.
Update 22-01-2014: Joined the ReMo Mozilla Reps program as an official Mozilla Representative in order to accomplish the above mentioned objective.
I'm also involved with the Mozilla L10N Urdu Team, to help localize Mozilla products such as Firefox (Desktop, Android, iOS), Firefox OS, Firefox Focus (Android, iOS) in Urdu language.
Update 26-09-2014: Joined the Firefox Student Ambassadors program as Regional Ambassador Lead (RAL) of Pakistan to help students in Pakistan establish Firefox Clubs and run our awesome activities & events on campus.
Update May 2016: Joined the Campus Advisory Committee (CAC) cohort to reinvent Mozilla's presence on college/university campus around the world by helping develop a new Mozilla on Campus project to replace all the previous initiatives. Mozilla Campus Clubs were launched in September 2016 and I have joined the Mozilla Campus Clubs program as Campus Advisor to help, support, guide, mentor, grow & develop it in general and in my region.
Tagsasia, communications, communications sig, community, community engagement, community management, firefox support, mozilla pakistan, pakistan, sf-monument, sumo, support, firefox student ambassadors, comms reps, community builders, fsa, speaks:en, thimble, l10n:ur, l10n:translation, repsmozfest2014, localization, webmaker, social contributors, recruiting, marketing, people, evangelism, business development, program management
Veščineadministrator social media, communication, communications, community, community builder, community building, community coordination, community development, community engagement, community management, community manager, firefox student ambassador, firefoxstudents, mozilla reps, social media, social media marketing, student mentoring
JezikiAngleščina, Urdujščina
Spletna stran
Zunanji računi
- Mozilla Discourse: mhasan
- Facebook: iam.mhasan
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/muhammedhasan
- MDN: MHasan
- Mozilla Wiki: Mhasan
- Mozilla Reps: mhasan
- Skype: m.hasan_a
- SlideShare: MuhammedHasanAhmed
- Mozilla Support: mha007
- Telegram: @MHasanAhmed
- Twitter: im_mhasan
- Mozilla Webmaker: mhasan
Sayak Sarkar
Hasan is an amazing contributor and community leader from Pakistan doing an awesome job in spreading the Mozilla mission and developing the Mozilla Pakistan community. As his reps mentor, I feel really proud of his achievements and the great work that he continues to do for the community.
Huda Sarfraz
Hasan has been contributing to Mozilla for quite a while now. He was contributing to support before I got to know him. He has since then took up creation and management of Mozilla Pakistan social media channels, and has been very active in the Firefox Student Ambassador Program, helping start a number of Firefox Clubs in Karachi. He has recently also become the Regional Ambassador Lead for Pakistan (https://wiki.mozilla.org/StudentAmbassadors/RAL#Pakistan).
Gauthamraj Elango
Hasan is a passionate mozillian from Pakistan who is doing a great work in spreading the mission of mozilla across the country. Recently, he stepped up to be a RAL and will lead all FSA related activities in the region.


text:
Log in
Choose your location to get a site experience tailored for you.
With offices in more than 90 cities in over 50 countries, we have a truly global perspective.
BCG uses cookies to improve the functionality, performance, and effectiveness of our communications. Detailed information on the use of cookies is provided in our Privacy Policy. By continuing to use this site, or by clicking "I agree," you consent to the use of cookies.


text:
It seems to go without saying that people who tend to be very planet conscience are also big animal lovers. Why wouldn't they be? Planetary conservation is dependent on the survival of all animal species, not just the human one.
In conjunction with this green living ideology, these loving pet parents should start to think in term of purchasing eco friendly products for their animals, especially dogs.
While cats have their own cleaning system, namely themselves, dogs will need more care to maintain their skin and coats. For this reason, earth conscious dog owners should start buying organic dog shampoo as well as eco friendly toys and treats
Now, before you shrug and say that your animal has been doing just find without such products, you need to consider the very real and multifaceted advantages if using an organic dog shampoo.
Cruelty free
A manufacturer of an organic product for dogs is going to take great pains to ensure that the product is cruelty free. This is not only ethically sound, it makes good business sense.
How stupid would it be to market an item made for an eco friendly, potentially Vegan customer base knowing that animals were harmed during product testing?
That said, just because a dog shampoo states it is organic, doesn't make it so. Check the ingredients to see if this is indeed the case. If the company is shown to place more chemical based ingredients on their shampoo, it isn't all natural and shouldn't be used.
When in doubt, do research on the company in question. If the merchandise is truly organically grown, more than likely it will in turn, be cruelty free.
Absence of chemicals, dyes and irritants
Many pet owners who use over the counter dog shampoos find that their dogs tend to scratch a lot. This is because most common shampoos contain irritants and ingredients that can make your dogs skin very dry.
In turn, the dog scratches, tearing out their hair and harming their coat.
Canines may even have the misfortune of developing a rash that makes their hair fall out in patches.
Caring owners will take their dog to a vet, but medicine will be ineffective if the allergic reaction is due to harsh chemicals from mainstream shampoo.
All natural pet shampoos formulated for dogs rarely have these side effects. This is because organic materials haven't been subjected to synthetic pesticides or the potent carcinogenic materials found in most commercial fertilizers.
This will reduce the likelihood of allergies or rashes associated with the chemicals commonly found in most grooming products.
Safe for human caregivers and the environment
Synthetic elements in regular dog shampoos can be extremely harmful to the pet parent as well as to their dog.
One recent study links pyrenthrins, a substance found in most dog shampoos, with autism. The jury is still out, but research has show that women who were pregnant and used products with pyrenthrins in them were more likely to have a child with autism than woman who did not.
Also, since human skin is less resistant to irritants than the skin of a dog, they are more likely to be harmed by dangerous chemicals far more rapidly.
Using organic dog shampoo with biodegradable materials eliminates the potential harm to human beings and doggies and observes conservation efforts simultaneously.
Final word
Interested consumers will be able to easily locate organic dog shampoo at a health food supermarket or via an online, eco friendly pet store.
Just think, the purchase of an all natural dog shampoo will protect your treasured pet's coat and make his skin healthy. This fact alone will make the hunt for an organic grooming product all the more worthwhile!


text:
Meeting Place
Klamath River Resort Inn
61700 Highway 96
Happy Camp, CA 96039
3 Days from $725View Dates & Prices
The Lower Klamath River in Northern California, just south of the Oregon border, gently winds through scenic splendor in the northwest corner of this state. The Klamath River, which runs free for 180 miles to the Pacific Ocean, is one of the first rivers in California to be granted National "Wild and Scenic" river status. The Klamath is treasured for its scenic beauty, diverse wildlife and recreational opportunities. The Lower Klamath section of this California river is a special place, often adored by OARS' littlest guests. The Klamath's water bubbles with bouncy, easy rapids and warm, pleasant swimming holes and is an ideal choice for those with young children interested in a family adventure vacation in California. One focus of this rafting experience is to help kids gain confidence and interest in the outdoors while the adults kick back and relax. As is true for so many other California rivers, the region is steeped in history. Gold miners and colorful characters flooded the area in the mid 1800's, and old mining sites line the river in various places. Your kids will become completely absorbed in trying to find their fortune with a gold pan, and you'll have fun watching them try.
Klamath River Resort Inn
61700 Highway 96
Happy Camp, CA 96039
Adult: $825
Youth: $725
Deposit: $250
Additional Costs:
Due to COVID-19 and operational constraints, we are unable to run any guided trips on the Lower Klamath River in 2020.
O.A.R.S. West, Inc. operates on the Lower Klamath River as a permitted outfitter of the Klamath National Forest
"Our family wanted to express our thanks and big pats on the back to all our river guides for a super trip on the Lower Klamath. We had a ball! Everyone was warm and friendly, making sure all of the families' needs were met. It was the small things (fresh brewed coffee and yogurts ready at 7:00 a.m. for the early risers) and the big things (handling food allergies and discussing safety all the time) that made the trip work. We loved the scenery and having the choice between rafts and inflatable kayaks. The food was plentiful and appealed to all ages. YUM! We learned about the ospreys, the river and so much more. You exceeded our expectations. We will definitely recommend OARS to our friends and family. If you saw the New York Times article, we did not know we were part of a growing trend: outdoor vacations with kids! "
–Robyn Wild ~ Briarcliff Manor, NY
"I cannot praise the guides enough! They were absolutely amazing! They were so attentive, supportive and downright funny when it came to my children. (And they made sure Mom had a great time, too!) They really went out of their way to teach my sons how to paddle and navigate the river, and learn safety awareness. Because of my complete confidence in them, I was able to truly relax and enjoy myself, too. "
-Melanie Powers ~ Palo Alto, CA
"Traveling with OARS on a river trip is such a pleasure. 'Effortless Camping' is how I best describe it! We even got a Yoga lesson on the beach overlooking the Klamath one evening! What a treat!!!!"
-Carol Kurtz ~ Carmel Valley, CA
"The scenery is beautiful. The guides were fantastic and professional. The trip was geared toward kids and there were nine kids in our group so my kids had fun meeting new friends."
–David Berens ~ Calabasas, CA


text:
Related Suppliers
Dark-to-light color changes on hot-runner systems can be time-consuming and costly for molders. Excessive downtime and scrap during color changes cut into processors' profit margins and can make them less competitive. Thermal-gate (hot-tip) designs in hot-runner systems are common and can be unusually difficult to clean, depending on the tip design. Here I'll discuss methods to assist with efficient dark-to-light color changes on hot-runner systems that are hot-tipped.
An injection molder's top priority is to achieve the highest possible productivity while utilizing the least amount of capital. Dark-to-light color changes can be problematic because of the possibility that the dark color could contaminate the lighter colored part (see Fig. 1). In many situations the streaking's origin is in the hot-runner system. That system is a complicated piece of tooling that on occasion allows for dead spots where color hangs up. The goal for injection molders is to be able to clean these dead spots quickly and efficiently.
Featured Content
Thermal gating or hot-tip gating generally represents a more economical mold investment than valve gating. The thermal gate (see Fig. 2) forms a small, solidified plastic slug (or bubble) inside the gate bore during the cooling time of the plastic part. This cold slug remains in the gate during the mold-open step, part ejection, and mold-close motion. With the next injection, the pressurized melt flushes the cold slug into the melt stream that fills the empty cavity. While all molding parameters (pressure, temperature, and time) are focused on producing a high-quality plastic part, they are also responsible for the formation of the cold slug at every cycle to avoid drooling and stringing at the gate.
The issue with purging a thermal-gate system is removing the color from the bubble at the gate of the hot-runner system. The larger the bubble, the more difficult it is to clean. The color in a smaller bubble may be removed by raising the hot-runner tip temperatures by 100° F and using a commercial purging copound to clean the machine. However, if the bubble is large, it will be impossible to remove the color without further action.
One way to counter large bubbles in the gate is to install thermoset inserts in the gate area. The inserts will reduce the size of the bubble, making it easier for the purging compound to remove the dark color. Raising the temperature of the hot-runner tip will also assist with the removal of the color. Most hot-runner manufactures offer thermoset inserts as an option to their customers.
Molders that have thermal-gate hot runners but no tip insulators will have to use a different approach for cleaning and maintaining the hot-runner system. The best solution for this scenario is to purge the machine and then remove the cavity plate. After that plate is removed, and time has been allowed for the tips to cool, each plastic bubble will have to be removed manually (Fig. 3). After all the bubbles are removed, the cavity plate may be replaced and then natural-color resin is run through the machine.
As a result, the bubble will become natural resin and make color changes easier because no dark color will be present in the gate. Using the purging compound after this task has been complete will be sufficient for for dark-to-light color changes.
When It Comes to Nylon, Don't Do the Math
Chemistry is seldom as simple as it looks. Polymer chemistry takes the complexity up a notch. Nylon chemistry is about much more than doing the math.
The Strain Rate Effect
The rate of loading for a plastic material is a key component of how we perceive its performance.
The New Look in Plastic -- It's Paper!
Synthetic paper based on filled polyethylene or polypropylene film has been around for decades without causing much excitement--until recently.


text:
Tate's Nails Alive Aromatherapy Polish Dryer - 1 fl oz
by Tate's
Customer Reviews
Legal Disclaimer:
The customer reviews posted below are based on individual consumer experiences and may NOT necessarily represent what expected results will be from using or taking Tate's Nails Alive Aromatherapy Polish Dryer - 1 fl oz. These results may not be typical and you should not necessarily expect to receive the same results. Actual results may vary.
Look for similar items by category
While we try ensure that product information is correct, on occasion manufacturers may alter their ingredient lists. Actual product packaging and materials may contain more and/or different information than that which is shown on our Web site. We recommend that you do not solely rely on the information presented on our website and that you always read labels, warnings, and directions before using or consuming a product. For additional information about a product, please contact the manufacturer. Content and information on this site is for reference purposes and is not intended to substitute for advice given by a physician, pharmacist, or other licensed health-care professional. You should not use this information as self-diagnosis or for treating a health problem or disease. Contact your health-care provider immediately if you suspect that you have a medical problem. Information and statements regarding dietary supplements have not been evaluated by eVitamins or the US Food and Drug Administration and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease or health condition. eVitamins assumes no liability for inaccuracies or misstatements about products.


text:
Don't have an account?
Forgot your password?
Or sign in with one of these services
Hey there, this site has a lot of muscle and dicks, so make sure you're 18+ and agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Service. We also want to feed you some Cookies, so open wide for daddy.


text:
Aging: 13 to 30 gets old fast
If you could see yourself through 13-year-old eyes, would you like the person you've become? That's the question posed by 13 Going on 30, a comedy most notable for proving Alias star Jennifer Garner is more than just a pretty pair of ass-kicking legs.
Although it fits in with this month's other teen-girl fantasies, Ella Enchanted and The Prince & Me, 13 Going on 30 belongs to the body-switch genre and begins in 1987, the year before the most successful of them, Big, was released.
Jenna Rink (Christa B. Allen) is turning 13 and having the usual problems. "I don't wanna be original. I wanna be cool," she tells her only true friend, Matt (Sean Marquette), the chubby boy next door who's always taking pictures. Jenna longs to be the seventh member of a clique called "The Six Chicks," but they only take advantage of her and laugh at her, sometimes waiting until her back is turned.
For her birthday Matt gives Jenna a dream house he built for her and a bag of Wishing Dust to make her dreams come true. He loves her so much it hurts to watch.
Jenna's wish– "to be 30, flirty, and thriving"– comes true. Instead of leaving her in the same place in a different body, the story goes the Rip Van Winkle route and she wakes up 17 years later, 17 years older, but still thinking like a 13-year-old. (No time is wasted on explanations. Albert Einstein is not credited as a script consultant.)
Now Jenna's (Garner) a "big-time magazine editor," sharing the duties at Poise, the magazine she used to read, with Lucy (Judy Greer), the former leader of The Six Chicks. They're outwardly best friends but secretly rivals. You see, Jenna's "a tough bitch."
And what of Matt (Mark Ruffalo)? Jenna tracks him down and learns they haven't spoken in 17 years. He takes pictures for a living now and is about to get married.
Jenna does some silly things (mostly given away in the trailer) with her 13-year-old brain but quickly becomes wise enough to realize Matt is the man for her and Poise is in danger of going down the tubes. Will she be able to turn things around in both situations? Clap if you believe in happy endings.
13 Going on 30 is the first Hollywood studio picture for director Gary Winick, who spearheaded InDigEnt, which produced several low-budget, digital video films including his own wonderful Tadpole. His hardcore romantic spirit peeks through occasionally, so he hasn't sold out completely, but it's obvious his heart isn't entirely in some of the commercial compromises he's had to make.
The soundtrack is from all over the '80s. If young Jenna were trying to fit in, she wouldn't idolize Rick Springfield in 1987 when his teen idoldom peaked in '81; and she wouldn't be dancing to Michael Jackson's 1984 Thriller or basing her philosophy on Pat Benatar's 1983 "Love Is a Battlefield." That said, the songs are easier on the ears than the '70s-centric score from Ella Enchanted.
Despite this effort to relate musically to anyone who adolesced at any time in the '80s, 13 Going on 30 is more likely to be remembered by today's 13-year-olds when they turn 30 than by today's 30-year-olds when they turn 31.


text:
Lynx Tigress Ironsview other products
If you'd like to hit more greens and escape some of the tricky spots you find yourself in, we think this forgiving iron set from Lynx might be for you.
This ladies set from Lynx will get your ball up in the air and flying towards target more easily thanks to its deep undercut cavities and forgiving wide soles.
Key features and benefits include:
- Deep undercut cavity creates low CG for higher launches and long carries
- Forgiving wide sole design
- Bold lavender metallic PVD finish
- Stock set in 5-SW
You don't want to make a long term investment like this without getting a custom fitting, so do talk to us if you'd like to come and test this set of Lynx irons.